Rhode Island School Recycling Project
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 923124717
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2022
- Location
- Providence, RI, USA
- Phone
- 4016416814
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $110,238
- Expenses
- $242,110
- Assets
- $66,522
- Liabilities
- $50
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Julie Dorsey (President)
- Katie Bowers (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Julie Dorsey (President)
- Katie Bowers (Vice President)
- Renee Chicione (Secretary)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Help public and private K-12 schools in Rhode Island rescue food waste produced in their meal programs while improving recycling rates and diverting healthy edible food from waste stream to food insecure students and their families by engaging students, custodians, food service workers, teachers, parents, administrators and outside vendors. When successful, the project will also generate student leaders interested in environmental sciences.
What it reported doing in 2024
During the last year we continued to expand the project in North Providence where we are working with the District under a USDA grant the town was awarded. We are now in all the schools except for the High School which we hope to launch during the next school year. Secondly, we continued to expand into additional schools and districts and trained students to divert healthy edible food from the waste stream, to recycle properly, pour off liquid waste and compost their food scraps. Lastly, we added to our staff team and our Board of Trustees which has increased our capacity and impact across the state. We now have functioning committees on the Board and have over 20 people, paid and volunteer, who attend a weekly staff zoom meeting on Monday mornings.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 92% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 20
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 80.8%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: $5.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -119.6%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 107.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -83.8% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -99.6% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 80.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $196K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.